The target for this test-bed trial was a static test firing of a solid-propellant
Minuteman missile at Hill Air Force Base. The SRI team remained blind to the target, and
anomalous cognition technology was competing with a variety of traditional sensors to
determine if and when the engine tests occurred. (Note: The CSL was under the direction of
Harold E. Puthoff, Ph.D. at the time of this test.)

Protocol  Rocket Test

During the week of 21 October 1976, two receivers were asked to "observe" for
one hour each day for five days.

Raw Data and Results  Rocket Test

One receiver described a dust-raising device resembling a "locomotive," and
produced a schematic diagram of the test layout. A second receiver described the event in
terms of a "drawn-out muffled roars" which raised dust clouds and involved
"glowing melting materials." This same receiver, asked to observe altogether
five similar events over a several-day period, correctly noted a sequence of three go, two
no-go conditions, corresponding to three tests and two cancellations. In addition, this
receiver was able to indicate the actual event time to within ten seconds in one of the
tests for which precise timing information was obtained.

We were later told by the government representative who had responsibility for the
test, that because of a variety of reasons such as weather conditions, the anomalous
cognition "sensor" was the only one to correctly identify the event on one of
the days.

This trial was designed to measure the accuracy and reliability of anomalous cognition
on directed energy systems. Obtaining receiver-dependent values in a test environment
would provide reasonable estimates for actual operations. (Note: At this time the CSL was
under the direction of Edwin C. May, Ph.D.)

Protocol  Accelerator

On 6 May 1987 receiver 372 traveled to Menlo Park in preparation for a 24-hour trial
that was to begin at 0800 hours on 7 May. Receiver 372 and the monitor were told that an
individual from the sponsoring organization, who was described by name and Social Security
number and who was not known to any of the SRI staff, was in the target area during the AC
sessions. In addition, they were told that, as part of the trial, two members of the SRI
Cognitive Sciences Laboratory staff who were known to them, would serve as a
"beacon" and would be at the specific target of interest between 2200 hours on 7
May and 0800 hours on 8 May. No other information was provide to the receiver or the
monitor. The out-bound team could be anywhere within a 100 mile radius of the CSL.

Four sessions were conducted to provide information at approximately 8-hour intervals.
The time and circumstances were as follows:

0800 Hours



Receiver 372 was asked to describe the geographical area and the gestalt of
the area of interest. He was also asked to provide as much detail as possible in real-time
(i.e., at 0835) and was targeted upon the sponsor's on-site representative.

1010 Hours



The receiver was asked to describe the details and activity at the site
designated by the sponsor's on-site representative as of 0000 hours 7 May (i.e., the
previous night).

1600 Hours



The receiver was asked to describe, in real-time, the details and activity
at the site designated by the sponsor's on-site representative.

2400 Hours



The receiver was asked to describe, in real-time the details and activity at
the site designated by two SRI personnel.

During each session receiver 372's responses were tape recorded, and he was encouraged
to draw details whenever possible. The monitor was free to seek clarification of specific
points throughout the sessions. We note that the data were lost for the 1010h session
because of a tape recorder failure.

Results  Accelerator

The primary target for the session was a 50-MeV electron accelerator located at a
remote site near Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. During the 0800h session, the
target person was located in building A at LLNL; at 1600h he was driving through the
windmill electric power farm at the Altamont pass; at 2400h, he and the SRI personnel were
located within the accelerator building at the remote site.

In the fuzzy set analysis, the accuracy
is defined as the percent of the target elements that was described correctly by the
receiver. The reliability is the percent of the receiver's response that was correct. The
following table shows the accuracy and reliability for the three targets for this 1987
example.

Accuracy and Reliability for High Technology Trial 1

Accuracy

Reliability

Accelerator

67

63

Windmill Farm

95

100

LLNL West Gate

85

95

Combined Total

77

78

Raw Data  Accelerator

Accelerator The data shown for this target is only a sample of the total. Sixty three
percent of what the receiver said was identified at the site.

This trial was designed to measure the accuracy and reliability of anomalous cognition
on directed energy systems. Obtaining receiver-dependent values in a test environment
would provide reasonable estimates for actual operations. (Note: At this time the CSL was
under the direction of Edwin C. May, Ph.D.)

Protocol  Microwave Generator

In this trial, the SRI team was completely blind to all details with the exception that
we knew that an event was to take place within the continental USA on 24-25 August 1988.
As in the first trial, we were provided the name and Social Security number of an
individual who would be on-site during the event.

On 23 August 1988 an SRI monitor flew to the East coast home of receiver 372 in
preparation for the 24-hour trial that was to begin at 1000 hours on 24 August. Four
sessions were conducted to provide information at approximately 8-hour intervals. The time
and circumstances were as follows:

1008 August 24



Receiver 372 was asked to describe the location and details of an event
in progress. Details about the pertinent personnel were also requested.

1500 August 24



Receiver 372 was asked to describe the details and activity at the site
demarked by the presence of the sponsor's on-site representative.

0910 August 25



The receiver was asked to expand his upon his descriptions from the
previous day.

1120 August 25



The receiver was asked to consolidate the information from the previous
scans and to provide his concluding remarks.

As before, receiver 372's responses were tape recorded, and he was encouraged to draw
details whenever possible. The monitor was free to seek clarification of specific points
throughout the sessions.

Results  Microwave Generator

The target for this trial was a high-power microwave generator in the New Mexico
desert. It was being used to test the vulnerability of electronic components. Using fuzzy set analysis, we found that the accuracy for the
microwave generator target was 80 percent and the reliability was 69 percent. That is, 80
percent of the intended target elements were described correctly and 69 percent of what
receiver 372 said was correct.